Check out the FAQ,Terms of Service & Disclaimers by clicking the
link. Please register
to be able to post. By viewing this site you are agreeing to our Terms of Service and Acknowledge our Disclaimers.
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster.
The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website.
By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
gsgs - We disagree on many things. This is only one.
I have worked with numbers for years and I am telling you, categorically, that it is impossible to predict mathematically with any accuracy a pandemic. Period.
If people think they can do this, then they probably think they can personally influence when sequences get released too.
</IMG>
what do you mean with : "it's impossible" ? It's being done.
Insurance companies do it. Individuals do it. Bookmakers do it.
It will be subjective but we should want to hear it
nevertheless.
"No expert is able to give a probability estimate of the occurence, duration, or intensity of a pandemic."
There are indeed many things happening around the world that are currently costing many human lives and/ or devastation. Earthquakes, tsunamis, wars, terrorist attacks, threats of terrorist attacks, TB, starvation, etc. There are two differences I see between these and a pandemic: one, a pandemic will effect peoples worldwide- not necessarily every country- but peoples around the world; and two, even with a low CFR, there would be a huge economic fallout worldwide. Any time available between now and the next pandemic has to be limited based on historical patterns. As responsible caretakers of ourselves, our families, our communities, and the extended world, the question then becomes "what do we do with that time? ...how do we utilize the time that is available?" It then is all about personal choices.
"I can see no other reasonable way than to urge experts to give us their probability estimates. Everything else is unscientific, nonprofound."
I happen to know something about probability.
I know that after years of trying to construct a mathematical model to predict if, when, or how hard, a hurricane will strike Orlando, it is impossible. There are too many unknowns and variables.
No expert is able to give a probability estimate of the occurence, duration, or intensity of a pandemic.
Nature is messy and unpredictable.
We must use history for our guide. Will there be another pandemic? Yes.
Will it be H5N1? Maybe.
Why not stock 8 weeks of food, water, and other essential items?
Why not reach out to neighbors and friends to establish a network of support?
There are many potential calamities in this world. H5N1 is only one.
</IMG>
yes, I know. Later he switched to a "no one knows" strategy
and didn't repeat his statement.
Also 50% for a pandemic without timeline.
And 50% "could" die, no mention how likely this is.
Osterholm said : "severe pandemic is imminent".
Peiris said : "pandemic within 10 years is extremely likely"
Salzberg said: 10% for H5N1-pandemic, 30%-50% for
a pandemic with reassorted H5N1. US-doctors said :
"50% for efficient h2h within 4 years"
Steele said : 20% within 12 months.
And that was earlier this year, when fear was larger.
Several months ago Webster On Nightline said at that time there was a 50% chance of H5N1 going pandemic and if it did there could be a 50% reduction in the worlds population
so, what's more important now, preparing for a pandemic or for a car-accident ? Should we spend more $$$ on masks and Tamiflu or should
we spend more $$$ on safer cars ?
I mean, it's important to quantify the risk.
There are thousands of other things that people should be warned
about too. Those warners can argue the same way how you did
and the people cannot distinguish how important the warning is.
I can see no other reasonble way than to urge experts to
give us their probability estimates. Everything else is
unscientific, nonprofound. Unless you are expert enough to build
your own opinion - but I won't claim that I am more qualified here
than Webster,Palese,Yi,Peiris,Taubenberger,Ferguson,Sal zberg etc.
we are not "due". There is no period in pandemics. And the current
situation with H5N1 is different from anything we know from
pandemic history. Neither do other diseases like Chicungunja,SARS,
wd40 allow a prediction for influenza-pandemic.
Experts with other opinions are Palese,Salzberg,Garcia Sastre.
But also Taubenberger,Webster,Peiris,Osterhaus,Oxford...alm ost everyone
sees it differently from Osterholm in that a severe pandemic is not necessarily
imminent. I haven't heard them repeating what Osterholm said.
Yes, the threat is big enough so we should prepare but "no one knows"
whether H5N1 will go pandemic or not - let alone whether
it's severe or imminent. Not even Osterholm.
WHO ist still at level 3, for what it's worth.
I can't see, why the danger should be larger this season than it was
last season or in 2004
how can he know, that the pandemic is close ?
He takes this as an axiom which needn't be elaborated.
Other experts disagree.
Who are these "experts"? Are they willing to stand up and be counted? Since we are talking about "experts" (and I use that term loosely) let's compare credentials. The Dr. Marc Siegel's of the world have grown strangely quiet. Do they fear ridicule for their opinions? I, for one, would appreciate hearing from experts who think there will not be a pandemic in the near future.
As my husband is fond of saying, "Opinions are like belly-buttons. Everybody has one." My, not so clever, reply to him is..."some carry more weight than others".
pandemics happen regularly. Thats how nature works.
last one was 1968 - 38 years ago - longest between them for 300 years has been 42 years. We are due.
The most likely candidate as of now is H5N1. It has a high kill rate.
The risk of not preparing for that in our modern interconnected JIT global supply system is just plain dumb.
SARS almost did go pandemic. Thank god it didnt - people stopped it... good detective work and global cooperation stopped it - the nature of the virus stopped it.
H5N1 will not be so easy to stop. And by all indications to date, H5N1 is lining up to be the next pandemic mother strain.
maybe not... but most likely yes.
Alarmist? You betcha.
Will it be bad?
Originally posted by gsgs
how can he know, that the pandemic is close ?
He takes this as an axiom which needn't be elaborated.
Other experts disagree.
He refuses to specify his risk assessment by assigning a
subjective probability to it.
He is no virologist, but to estimate the probability
that H5N1 goes pandemic, you have to check for the mutations
and reassortments.
He is epidemiologist, so can estimate how bad the pandemic
would be, when there is one. But not whether there will be one
or not.
So, when he says: "massive flu pandemic is imminent" or
"not if but when" or "1830 was as severe as 1918" ,
or his colorful comparisons - that's alarmistic.
As he was with SARS in 2003.
how can he know, that the pandemic is close ?
He takes this as an axiom which needn't be elaborated.
Other experts disagree.
He refuses to specify his risk assessment by assigning a
subjective probability to it.
He is no virologist, but to estimate the probability
that H5N1 goes pandemic, you have to check for the mutations
and reassortments.
He is epidemiologist, so can estimate how bad the pandemic
would be, when there is one. But not whether there will be one
or not.
So, when he says: "massive flu pandemic is imminent" or
"not if but when" or "1830 was as severe as 1918" ,
or his colorful comparisons - that's alarmistic.
As he was with SARS in 2003.
The message from Osterholm is consistent. Plan now, prepare now, or suffer greatly. The pandemic is close and those in charge who remain sceptical put the rest of us at risk.
History shows that over the past three centuries, a new pandemic has emerged at least every 50 years, and experts believe we may be due for the next one. The likely culprit is the H5N1 virus, known as avian influenza. To date, the virus has not spread regularly from human to human, but scientists believe it is only a matter of time before it mutates into a form that allows that kind of transmission.
Sometime in the very near future, the next influenza pandemic will sweep across the globe, infecting billions, killing millions, crippling health care systems and bringing economies to a halt.
This, a leading expert on infectious disease told an audience Thursday, is not a guess. It's not a theory or a worst-case scenario. It is a sure thing.
That's the bad news, said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.
The good news is there still is time to soften the blow.
"The issue is not if, it's when, so we have to prepare," Osterholm said. "The worst thing we can do is not prepare and think it will not happen.
"The truth of the matter is, there's a lot we can do about it," he said.
Osterholm, who has discussed pandemic influenza on CNN, "Nightline" and "The Oprah Winfrey Show," brought his knowledge of the subject to a town hall meeting hosted by the McHenry County Department of Health.
A flu pandemic, Osterholm said, occurs when a new influenza strain emerges that is readily transmitted among humans, is genetically unique to earlier strains and possesses increased virulence, or the ability to kill.
The last time a pandemic occurred was in 1968 when H3N2 -- better known as Hong Kong flu -- emerged, killing an estimated 700,000 worldwide, including nearly 40,000 in the United States.
History shows that over the past three centuries, a new pandemic has emerged at least every 50 years, and experts believe we may be due for the next one. The likely culprit is the H5N1 virus, known as avian influenza. To date, the virus has not spread regularly from human to human, but scientists believe it is only a matter of time before it mutates into a form that allows that kind of transmission.
Osterholm, a consultant for the U.S. departments of Homeland Security and Human Services, believes when it does it will kill at least 2.7 million worldwide and as many as 360 million in a worst- case scenario.
And if that happens, Osterholm predicts, it will overwhelm limited federal and state resources, leaving communities to fend for themselves.
To do that Osterholm said, communities need to start today at creating leadership networks, planning relief efforts and building health-care strategies in their local areas.
"Nobody in Washington or even Springfield is going to be here to help you, so you need to start thinking about this now," he said. "No investment you ever make in this is going to be wasted."
Although Osterholm said he believes tough times are ahead when the pandemic hits, he said despairing over it is no more of a solution than hoping it never comes.
"Every population that endured one of these has survived it," he said. "We just have to keep telling ourselves that."
Leave a comment: